Writing a successful applied linguistics conference abstract: The relationship between stylistic and linguistic features and raters’ evaluations

IF 3.1 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of English for Academic Purposes Pub Date : 2024-10-14 DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101450
Matt Kessler , Caitlin Cornell , J. Elliott Casal , Detong Xia
{"title":"Writing a successful applied linguistics conference abstract: The relationship between stylistic and linguistic features and raters’ evaluations","authors":"Matt Kessler ,&nbsp;Caitlin Cornell ,&nbsp;J. Elliott Casal ,&nbsp;Detong Xia","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The conference abstract (CA) is a promotional genre that is vital to academic success. However, composing a high-quality abstract can be challenging for both first (L1) and second language (L2) writers. Some researchers have performed contrastive analyses of accepted/rejected CAs, yet few studies have analyzed the extent to which different stylistic and linguistic features can predict reviewers' scores. The current study furthers this line of inquiry, while also responding to scholars' recent calls for more replication work in the fields of applied linguistics and second language acquisition. Using a corpus of 304 abstracts from an applied linguistics conference, the current study is an approximate replication that analyzes the extent to which 32 variables are predictive of CA raters’ evaluations. Data analyses consisted of multiple stages, including examining the relationships between CA scores and nine stylistic variables (e.g., rhetorical moves, study completeness) and 23 linguistic variables (e.g., grammatical errors, and lexical and syntactic complexity measures). Statistically significant variables were then entered into a regression model. Results suggest that seven variables accounted for approximately 25 percent of CA scores. The pedagogical implications of these findings are discussed for L1/L2 writers, along with future research directions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":"72 ","pages":"Article 101450"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158524001188","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The conference abstract (CA) is a promotional genre that is vital to academic success. However, composing a high-quality abstract can be challenging for both first (L1) and second language (L2) writers. Some researchers have performed contrastive analyses of accepted/rejected CAs, yet few studies have analyzed the extent to which different stylistic and linguistic features can predict reviewers' scores. The current study furthers this line of inquiry, while also responding to scholars' recent calls for more replication work in the fields of applied linguistics and second language acquisition. Using a corpus of 304 abstracts from an applied linguistics conference, the current study is an approximate replication that analyzes the extent to which 32 variables are predictive of CA raters’ evaluations. Data analyses consisted of multiple stages, including examining the relationships between CA scores and nine stylistic variables (e.g., rhetorical moves, study completeness) and 23 linguistic variables (e.g., grammatical errors, and lexical and syntactic complexity measures). Statistically significant variables were then entered into a regression model. Results suggest that seven variables accounted for approximately 25 percent of CA scores. The pedagogical implications of these findings are discussed for L1/L2 writers, along with future research directions.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
成功撰写应用语言学会议摘要:文体和语言特点与评分者评价之间的关系
会议摘要(CA)是一种对学术成功至关重要的宣传体裁。然而,撰写高质量的摘要对第一语言(L1)和第二语言(L2)写作者来说都是一项挑战。一些研究人员对被接受/被拒绝的论文摘要进行了对比分析,但很少有研究分析不同的文体和语言特点能在多大程度上预测审稿人的评分。目前的研究进一步推进了这一研究方向,同时也响应了学者们最近提出的在应用语言学和第二语言习得领域开展更多复制工作的呼吁。本研究使用了一个应用语言学会议的 304 篇摘要语料库,近似复制分析了 32 个变量在多大程度上可以预测 CA 评委的评价。数据分析包括多个阶段,其中包括研究 CA 评分与 9 个文体变量(如修辞动作、研究完整性)和 23 个语言变量(如语法错误、词法和句法复杂性测量)之间的关系。然后将具有统计学意义的变量输入回归模型。结果表明,七个变量约占 CA 分数的 25%。本文讨论了这些发现对 L1/L2 级写作者的教学意义以及未来的研究方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of English for Academic Purposes provides a forum for the dissemination of information and views which enables practitioners of and researchers in EAP to keep current with developments in their field and to contribute to its continued updating. JEAP publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges in the linguistic, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic description of English as it occurs in the contexts of academic study and scholarly exchange itself.
期刊最新文献
“Contrary to findings from previous studies …”: Paradigmatic and ethnolinguistic influences on disagreement negotiation in research article discussions Noun phrase complexity in English integrated writing placement test responses Developing advanced citation skills: A mixed-methods approach to corpus technology training for novice researchers Writing a successful applied linguistics conference abstract: The relationship between stylistic and linguistic features and raters’ evaluations From words to senses: A sense-based approach to quantitative polysemy detection across disciplines
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1